Pankaj Kumar vs State Of U.P.Thru Secy. Food & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6648 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 35 of 2021
 
Appellant :- Pankaj Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru Secy. Food & Civil Supply Lko & Ors.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Virendra Kumar Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Satish Kumar Sharma
 

 
Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

C.A. Application No. 16133 of 2021.

1. This application seeks leave to appeal.

2. Heard.

3. Allowed. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted.

On Memo

1. Heard.

2. This intra-Court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule-5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules has been filed with some delay, challenging the order dated 2nd December, 2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.14815 (M/S) of 2019.

3. As per admitted facts, in the writ-Court the respondent no. 4 had filed the writ petition, challenging the orders dated 26th February, 2018 and 11th April, 2019 passed by the prescribed Authority, cancelling the fair-price-shop licence, as well as the order passed by the appellant Authority under Section 13(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016.

4. Under Chapter-VIII Rule-5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, special appeal is not maintainable against the appellate order. The Full Bench of this Court in Sheet Gupta v. State of U.P. and others, 2010 (28) LCD 1045 has categorically held that appeal, against the appellate order, would not be maintainable. Paragraph-19 of Sheet Gupta v. State of U.P. and others (supra), on reproduction, reads as under:-

19. In view of the forgoing discussion, our answer to the question referred to us is as follows:-

A special appeal would not lie under the provisions of Rule 5 of the Chapter VIII of the Rules where the judgment has been given by a learned single Judge in a writ petition directed against an order passed in an appeal under paragraph 28 of the Distribution Order, 2004."

5. In view of the above, we are of the considered view that the instant appeal, in the present facts, is not maintainable. It is, accordingly, dismissed.

[D.K. Singh, J.] [R.R. Awasthi, J.]

Order Date :- 24.6.2021MVS/-